1
Directional Element Design for Protecting Circuits with Capacitive Fault and Load Currents
Mike Benitez, P.E., EPSII, Joe Xavier, ABB Inc.
Karl Smith, P.E., David Minshall, ABB Inc.
Abstract— This paper, based on real world event data,
introduces a state of the art directional element that has been
proven to prevent many of the commonly reported mis-operations
caused by traditional directional elements. Such examples include
wind farm collector circuits where there have been a significant
number of documented occurrences of false trips due to leading
power factor loads caused by dynamic VAR controllers. To
mitigate, several ‘work around’ solutions have been devised and
published. These include creative yet cumbersome approaches that
use load encroachment and reverse power functions, both of which
have limitations since they were never intended for that purpose.
There are also challenges using traditional directional elements for
situations where the fault current is capacitive. Such examples
include ground fault current in networks that can be operated as
either isolated or compensated. All of these challenges can be
overcome using an ‘easy to set’ flexible directional element design
that allows for the phase angle operating characteristics to be
extended or retracted through its minimum/maximum forward and
reverse angle settings. For quick and efficient evaluation of study
cases, specific directional element settings have been modeled in
protection design software as they appear in the relay to ensure the
relay will respond securely and reliably for all operating conditions
(grounding methods), system variables and fault scenarios
encountered. The paper provides test data and oscillography
reports from event (COMTRADE) files to validate the directional
element’s performance.
Key Terms— Capacitive load , capacitive fault (ground), capacitive
and conductive discharge, wind farm collector unit, dynamic VAR
controller, isolated network, compensated network, Peterson coil,
parallel resistance, characteristic angle, operate area
I. INTRODUCTION
Traditional directional elements have many applications, and
for the most part they are well understood. There are however a
few unique, but not uncommon, situations involving capacitive
load and fault currents where this is not the case. For these
situations, a new, more flexible directional element design is
introduced that allows the phase angle operating area to be
extended or retracted through its Minimum/Maximum forward
and reverse angle settings to prevent mis-operations [1]. This
paper looks at two real world examples where
retracting/extending the operating area has proven effective in
mitigating false trips. The first example addresses recorded
events from directional relays that mis-operated due to capacitive
load generated from wind turbine generators using dynamic
VAR controllers. The second, deals with potential mis-
operations due to connecting a normally isolated network, where
the ground fault current is capacitive (both directions), to a
compensated network where ground fault current is resistive-
inductive in the forward direction and capacitive in the reverse
direction. The directional element settings have been modeled in
protection design software to validate the relay’s performance
for all operating conditions and fault scenarios.
II. DIRECTIONAL ELEMENT DESIGN FEATURES
Designing a flexible directional element requires a thorough
knowledge of the power system. Many things must be taken into
account such as the selection of polarization quantity (i.e., V1 or
VA for phase directional and -V0 or -V2 for ground faults),
method of neutral point grounding and fault impedance to name
a few. However, for the scope of this paper only the key design
features necessary to understand the main concepts for the
project examples will be discussed. For a full explanation on how
the directional over-current function operates refer to the relay
technical manual [1] and other references cited in this paper.
A. Modes of Operation
The relay makes its directional decision by determining if the
angle between the operating current and polarizing voltage has
entered the elements operating sector. Table 1 shows three
commonly used operation mode settings in the relay.
TABLE 1
OPERATION MODES
Operate Mode Description
Operating sector defined by Min/Max
forward and reverse angle settings
‘Phase angle’
relative to Relay Characteristic Angle
(RCA)
Operating sector defined as forward when
‘I0Sin’ value is positive and reverse when
‘I0Sin’
negative. Uses reactive component of
operate current in isolated networks
Operating sector defined as forward when
‘I0Cos’ value is positive and reverse
‘I0Cos’
when negative. Uses active component of
operate current in compensated networks
B. Relay Characteristic Angle
The Relay Characteristic Angle (RCA) setting is used in
‘Phase angle’ Operation mode. A 360 degree setting range is
used to adjust the directional element operation according to the
method of neutral point grounding. It is the impedance angle
commonly referred to as the maximum torque angle (MTA). By
convention it is the complex conjugate of the operate current
phasor (at maximum torque) with respect to the polarizing
voltage (reference). In solidly grounded networks, the RCA (φ)
is set typically between + 60° to +75° (lagging or inductive)
depending on the voltage level. For isolated networks φ is set to
-90° (leading or capacitive) and for compensated networks it is
set to 0° (unity or resistive).
C. Extended or Retracted Operating Area
When the Operation mode setting is selected to ‘Phase angle’
the operating area can be extended or retracted using its
Minimum/Maximum forward and reverse angle settings to
provide greater or less directional coverage for the capacitive
fault and load currents described in the this paper.
 2

III. PHASE ANGLE CHARACTERISTICS

The phase angle criterion method is used to determine
direction when the Operation mode is set to ‘Phase angle’. This
mode allows full flexibility for defining the forward and reverse
directional operating sectors. The sector limits for the forward
operating area are controlled using the Min forward angle and
Max forward angle settings. The Min forward angle setting
adjusts the clockwise sector relative to the RCA, and the Max
forward angle, the counter-clockwise sector. Likewise, the
reverse operating area is controlled using the Min reverse angle
and Max reverse angle settings. The Min reverse angle setting
adjusts the clockwise sector relative to the RCA, and the Max
reverse angle, the counter-clockwise sector.

Fig 2. Phase angle characteristics for an isolated neutral network (67N).

Directional decision making in isolated neutral networks can

also be made by setting the Operation mode to ‘I0Sin’. This
method uses the reactive component of the operate current. The
operate criteria for ‘I0Sin’ is the same as the ‘Phase angle’
Operation mode since both rely on a -90° RCA. Figure 3 shows
‘I0Sin’ criteria for a typical 67N function used in an isolated
neutral network.

Fig 1. Phase angle characteristics for solidly grounded system (67P).

Figure 1 shows phase angle characteristics for a traditional phase

over-current directional element (67P). The operating sectors
and RCA are typical for a solidly grounded network.

IV. ISOLATED NETWORKS

Historically isolated neutral (ungrounded) networks have
been used in mission critical environments where continuity of
power is very important. Although fault levels are generally low,
there is a risk of insulation damage due to evolving and re-
striking ground faults. This has led to a trend using high
resistance grounding which accomplishes the same purpose only
with less chance of escalating voltages during arcing faults [2].
In isolated neutral networks, there is no intentional connection
between the power system neutral and ground. The only path for
zero sequence (ground) current to flow is through the line-to-
ground capacitance (C0) and leakage resistance (R0) for each
phase. For this reason, the ground fault current is mainly
capacitive. Figure 4 illustrates “The healthy feeds the faulty”
principle that results in the -90° angular phase shift with respect
to the – V0 polarizing voltage [3]. Therefore the RCA should be
set to -90°. Figure 2 shows phase angle characteristics for a
typical 67N function used in an isolated neutral network.
Fig 3. ‘I0 Sin’ characteristics for an isolated neutral network (67N).
V. COMPENSATED NETWORKS
Also known as ‘resonance’ grounding (somewhat of a
misnomer), compensated networks use an adjustable arc
suppression (ASC) or ‘Peterson coil’ in ungrounded systems to
quench arcing faults on overhead lines [4]. This is accomplished
by selecting a reactor inductance such that the magnitude of
current flowing through the reactor is nearly equal to (in order to
avoid resonance), or ‘compensates’ for, the capacitive single line
to ground fault current. The compensating effect of the coil and
the resulting resistive current seen by the relay are illustrated in
Figure 7. The resistive current remaining (≈ 5% of capacitive
current) due to network losses facilitates extinguishing of arc [4].

Fig 4. Ground fault in an isolated neutral network.
A system in which the inductive fault current is greater than
capacitive fault current is referred to as over-compensated, and
when less than, under-compensated. In practice the network is
typically operated 5% overcompensated for most European
systems (where this type of grounding is most prevalent). This
is based on the assumption that it is more likely for sections of
the network to become disconnected, which if operated under-
compensated, could result in a resonant condition. This condition
is undesirable since it can lead to over-voltages causing
insulation breakdown. Harmonics can also be amplified which
can lead to voltage distortion and thermal over-loading of
equipment [5].
Because capacitive and inductive fault currents nearly cancel
each other out, it is mainly the remaining resistive operate current
that is used to make the directional decision. Therefore the RCA
Fig 5. Phase angle characteristics for a compensated network (67N).
3
should be set to 0°. Figure 5 shows phase angle characteristics
for a typical 67N function used in a compensated network. Since
the resistive current is often small, a parallel resistor in the
compensation circuit is often needed to boost its magnitude to
detectable levels. The added resistance also improves directional
security by countering the angle of the reactive component which
can vary depending on the degree of coil compensation.
Directional decision making in compensated networks can
also be made by setting the Operation mode to ‘I0Cos’. This
method uses the active component of the operate current. The
operate criteria for ‘I0Cos’ is the same as the ‘Phase angle’ since
both rely on a 0° RCA. Figure 6 shows ‘I0Cos’ criteria for a
typical 67N function used in an isolated neutral network. This
method is similar in principle to the wattmetric relay [6].
Fig 6. ‘I0Cos’ characteristics for a compensated network (67N)
.
 4

Fig 7. Ground fault in a compensated network

.
VI. EXAMPLE – COLORADO HIGHLANDS WIND FARM
False tripping of directional elements in relays protecting
wind farm collector circuits is a phenomenon that until recently,
has not been well understood. Several papers have been
published recommending methods to make directional decisions
at wind farms more secure. Such methods include lowering the
MTA (to skew the operating area) and incorporating various load
encroachment solutions [7], [8], [9]. All of these methods are
aimed at blocking a portion of the relay’s tripping area, which by
convention is defined as forward looking into the Wind Turbine
Generator (WTG) referenced from the collector bus (Figure 9).
This is the region where the WTG is absorbing VARS
(reactive power flowing out of collector bus or into WTG) while
delivering Watts (real power flowing into collector bus or out of
WTG) to the utility. For this condition the load is capacitive since
the WTG is absorbing VARS. From the utility the WTG looks Fig 9. Simplified one line diagram of wind farm collector circuit
like an inductive load that is used to bring down the terminal
The same phenomenon occurred several times at Colorado
voltage. Because the over-current pickup is set sensitively (about
Highlands Wind Farm. Figure 9 shows a simplified one line
120% of maximum auxiliary load), the relay will trip
diagram of the wind farm collector circuit. To investigate the
unintendedly for leading (capacitive) power factor loads. Figure problem, an electrical power systems testing company
8 shows that traditional directional element settings will cause a downloaded the relay event files that were triggered by these
relay trip if there is enough capacitive load (on the system side). mis-operations. From those, the greatest WTG capacitive load
angle was 231° leading (with respect to V1 reference of relay).
The wave form capture for this event is shown in Figure 10. To
mitigate the false trips, a load encroachment solution was
suggested.
Load encroachment is an impedance based application for
blocking distance elements. To implement this solution
numerous settings and logic would have to be manipulated in
order to adapt it to wind farm directional applications. There are
also setting limitations that require pickup current, which needs
to be set sensitively, to be greater than 10% of CT secondary
(positive sequence only) [10]. This could also be problematic.
Skewing the MTA moderately to rotate the forward operating
area away from capacitive region has also been considered as an
option, but was ruled out in favor of load encroachment due to
high capacitive angles shown in event reports [7]. Even if
Fig 8. Mis-operation of traditional directional element
 5

lowered to the minimum setting in the relay (5° lagging) it may does not cover the entire range of possible load generating
not be enough to block for highly capacitive loads especially if angles. Determining the likelihood of this condition occurring
some measurement error is introduced. It also prevents blocking however, requires further study than what the event reports are
in the first quadrant (upper right) of phasor plot, and therefore showing. This will be addressed later in the paper.

Fig10. Phasors from wave form capture program for capacitive load generating event at Colorado Highlands Wind Farm.

Therefore due to the number of mis-operations, the complexity that the phasors matched the event report from the relay that mis-
of the suggested solution, and the setting limitations of the operated. The reverse angle settings for both tests were left at
solution, the testing company sought out to find a relay default since they did not impact the test.
manufacturer that could offer a more convenient and practical
method, one already built into the directional element.
The recommended solution was to use the relay which had the
Min/Max forward and reverse angle settings described in section
III. Setting group 1 in the relay (Figure 11) was then used to retract
the forward operating area by setting the Minimum forward angle
setting to 48°. Phase angle characteristics are shown in Figure 13.
This allows all capacitive load points to be blocked for active
power flowing out of WTG. This was adequate for all the
capacitive generation angles recorded in the Colorado Highlands
events reports and other event reports cited in this paper using the
Fig 12. Relay settings to mimic tradition directional element.
load encroachment solution. To confirm the relay was secure, the
Comtrade file for the event was played back to the relay, and as
expected the relay did not trip.

Fig 11. Relay settings for retracted forward operating area.

Setting Group 2 in the relay (Figure 12) was used as a baseline

to mimic the traditional directional element settings in the relay
that caused the mis-operation. To confirm the mis-operation, the
Comtrade file for the event was played back to the relay, and as Fig 13. Correct operation using retracted operating area.
expected the relay tripped. The event report from the relay verified
 6

Fig 14. Test results for retracted operating area (left) and traditional directional element settings (right) showing potential area of mis-operation.

The relay was also tested using a directional element module to The Min and Max forward angle settings were chosen to block
verify correct operation over the entire range of operating angles. all generating points with exception of the expected fault region
Figure 14 shows the retracted forward operating area (+48 to - (0 to 85°) for a relay characteristic angle of 42°. The settings for
90° on plot) for the test which is shaded in green. Test results for the directional element were entered using an interface that was
the recommended relay settings to retract the operating area developed specifically to emulate the relay setting and logic
(Setting Group 1) are shown on left side of Figure 14. The test structure in the relay (Figure 15).
was successful since points inside the forward area resulted in a
relay trip while points outside of it did not. The test results for
the relay settings mimicking a traditional directional element
(Setting Group 2) are shown on the right side of Figure 14. The
test points recorded in red denote the potential area of mis-
operation caused by the relay unintendedly tripping in the
forward zone under capacitive load.
Event reports alone however will not address all potential
mis-operations. There are some other important factors to
consider. A majority of WTGs today have either partial or full
converter based power electronics (Type 3 & 4) that are able to
provide reactive power and voltage support capabilities.
Although beyond the scope of this paper, it is essential to
understand that these types of WTGs have behaviors that can be
unpredictable for fault conditions [11]. Consequently numerous
directional mis-operations have resulted. For this reason, line
differential protection has been suggested as an option to make Fig 15. Relay settings (67P) page in protection design software to mimic traditional
directional element.
protection more secure [11]. Unlike conventional generation,
WTGs cannot be modeled with a voltage source behind an
impedance. Instead a transient time domain model based on the The main object of the study was to find out what conditions
control system characteristics is required. The algorithm of the caused load generating points to enter the forward operating area,
control system significantly limits the fault current to protect particularly in the expected fault region (0° to 85°) where
switching devices in the converter electronics. It is also directional element angle settings and load encroachment logic
important to note these characteristics vary widely with could not be used to block trip since the load appears as a fault.
manufacturer and version of the control system [11]. The study showed that when active power is zero (lack of wind)
or significantly lower than auxiliary load, then mis-operations
To determine the full range of possible generating angles, a will occur. Auxiliary power was assumed to be 10% of MVA
wind farm collector circuit was modeled in protection design wind turbine generator rating at 0.85 lagging power factor.
load flow and short circuit analysis software (Figure 16). Six
collector circuits totaling 22.5 MW each were used for the study. The effects of active power for 0, 20 and 80 percent of WTG
The wind turbines were Type 3 Doubly-fed induction generators. rating are shown on the impedance plot Figure 17. When
Several factors were taken into consideration: terminal voltage is uniformly increased from 0.95 pu to 1.05 pu,
it can be seen what sections of positive sequence impedance
· WTG ratings trajectories (Z seen) are entering the forward operating area and
· Capability curves causing a trip (within the blue pick-up impedance circle). The
· Rated maximum auxiliary power forward operating area is shown for a 60° MTA (instead of 45°)
· Utility voltage (at POI) for the purpose of clarity on the plot.

Fig 16. One line diagram of wind farm collector unit modeled in protection design software.
Fig 17. Impedance trajectory plot showing effect of changing utility voltage
(0.95 – 1.05 pu) for active power levels of 0, 20 and 80%.
From Figure 17, it can be clearly seen that at 20 and 80 percent
of WTG rating, the trajectories will enter the forward operating
area in the second quadrant (upper left) of the plot. (active power
is greater than auxiliary power). If traditional directional
elements are used then a mis-operation (trip) will result.
7
However because these points are not in the expected fault
region, load encroachment or angle settings can be used to block
trip. Note as the terminal voltage increases, the load becomes
more capacitive (WTG is absorbing more VARS). In this
situation, the WTG acts as an inductive load to bring the voltage
down at the utility.
At 20 percent of WTG rating, the load angle is approaching
90° which is what the angle settings to block trip should be based
on. At 80 percent of WTG rating, the load angle reaches to about
120°. Settings to block trip based at this angle are only adequate
based on what the event reports indicate, not the entire range of
generating angles outside the fault region.
For 0 percent of WTG rating, the trajectory will enter the
forward operate area in the first (upper right) and fourth
quadrants (lower right) of the plot (active power is less than
auxiliary power). However, the first quadrant is the only area of
concern since load points are within the pick-up range of the
relay and in the expected fault region. Unfortunately in this
situation, neither load encroachment nor directional element
angle settings can be used to block relay trip. In this case, these
methods can only be used to minimize the chance of mis-
operation. If picked up in the forward area of quadrant 4 then this
is not a problem since load encroachment or angle settings can
be used to block trip. Results from load flow study are shown in
Figure18. Trip points are denoted by a red ‘x’. Red dots indicate
relay did not operate.

Fig 18. Impedance plot for most secure retracted operating area.
Fig 19. Phase angle characteristics for most secure retracted operating area.
Because the results of the study can differ, it is not always known
which generation points will enter the forward operating area.
Therefore a conservative approach was taken to block all
possible forward generating angles outside the expected fault
region of 0 to 85°. This provides the most secure relay operation
possible. Phase angle characteristics are shown in Figure 19.
This does not imply however that false trips will occur. It all
comes down to the following two questions:
1. What is the minimum active power of the wind
generation unit while producing maximum capacitive
current?
2. What is the maximum auxiliary load consumed by the
wind generation unit?
If active power generation is greater than auxiliary load then the
seen impedance in the forward operating area will be in the
second quadrant of the z plot shown in Figure 17. Therefore
directional element angle settings can be used to retract the
forward operating angle in accordance with Figure 13. This
condition occurs if wind generation requires some active power
to produce reactive (capacitive) power (VARS flowing into
WTG). This is characterized by the ‘Triangular’ shaped
capability curve shown in Figure 20.
8
If reactive power can be produced with no active power or
active power less than auxiliary load (characterized by the
‘Rectangular’ or ‘D’ shaped red and black capability curves in
Figure 20) then the seen impedance in the forward operating area
will be in the first and fourth quadrant of the z plot shown in
Figure 18 [13]. In this case, the conservative directional element
angle settings in Figure 19 can be used to at least minimize the
chance of mis-operations by allowing trip in the fault region
(quadrant 1) and blocking trip in inductive load region (quadrant
4, VARS flowing out of WTG).
Fig 20. Wind turbine generator capability curves at nominal voltage.
Based on question 2 above, the over-current pick-up can be
set above maximum auxiliary (about 120%) to provide the
highest sensitivity with a safe margin. If active power is less than
auxiliary load then another solution would be to increase the
over-current pick-up until simulation results show no operation
for load in expected fault region. Then check if relay can see
faults at most remote lateral or low side of WTG step-up
transformer [7]. If pick-up is above 120% of total rated WTG
load then over-current protection can be non-directional.
Otherwise it may be necessary to re-evaluate minimum power
operational limits. This condition is based on theoretical results
from the load flow study. The likelihood of operating at zero or
low active power is unknown and requires further investigation.
VII. EXAMPLE – REFSDAL POWER SYSTEM
Directional element security using traditional methods is also a
concern for capacitive ground faults in some situations. For
instance when a normally isolated power system is connected to
a compensated system. In this case using only one mode of
operation for directionality is not possible since the method of
neutral point grounding changes. One approach to this problem
is to use two setting groups, one for the isolated system (I0Sin)
and one for the compensated one (I 0Cos). However in some
situations this solution may not be practical since the grounding
facility may be located several kilometers from the substation.
An alternative solution would be to use the Min and Max forward
angle settings to extend the operating area of the directional
element so that the same settings could be used to detect faults
for both isolated and compensated power systems.
This idea was proposed in a master’s thesis by Anniken
Liland Fredriksen from the Norwegian University of Science and
Technology (NTNU) to apply the same settings for both isolated
and compensated systems [3]. The solution was to extend the
forward operating set for a compensated system (RCA = 0°) to
allow fault detection in an isolated system using a relay with the
directional element design discussed in this paper [12]. The
simulations showed that extending the operate area offered a
valid solution for detecting forward and reverse faults up to
 9

3000Ω (standard for the Norwegian state). Furthermore that
accurate modeling was needed to set the directional element
angle settings correctly. In particular for reverse faults which
could possibly enter the forward operating area, now extended
for the dual application.
The thesis was written in cooperation with Statkraft who
provided simulations and modeling for the 22 kV power system
using ATPDraw, a program with an EMTP and graphical user
interface developed by professor Hans Kristian Hoidalen of
NTNU [3]. The relay under study was to set to protect the Fosse
line in the Refsdal distribution system (owned by the Norwegian
energy producer Statkraft) shown in Figure 21. The Refsdal
distribution system, operates with an isolated transformer neutral
by default. In case of an emergency the system is connected in
parallel to a compensated system known as ‘Hove’ (owned by
local distributor Sognekraft) shown in Figure 25. The coil at
Hove, operating at 5% overcompensated, has two parallel
resistors. RP1 and RP2: having respective ohmic values of 2581Ω
and 1291 Ω. Rp1 is connected during normal operation. When Vo
exceeds 10% of phase voltage Rp1 is disconnected (after a 1.5s
delay), and then 2 seconds later Rp2 is connected.
After the modeling was completed, a fault study was run to
evaluate the impact of connecting to the compensated system as
well as the effect of the two parallel resistors. For forward faults
the Fosse bus was selected, and for reverse faults the ST3 bus
was selected. Fault resistance was assumed to be 0 Ω. Fault
values remained approximately the same regardless of which
busses were selected. When the system is operated isolated,
faults in both directions are capacitive. If connected to the
compensated system, then faults in the forward direction are
resistive (with inductive component due to over-compensation),
and faults in the reverse direction are capacitive. Switching from
RP1 and RP2 increases the resistive component of the operating
current providing improved directional security. The impedance
plot shown in Figure 23 displays the results of the simulation.
The plot characteristics and fault points are shifted 180° to align
with the –V0 reference of the relay when converted to the phasor
domain plot shown in Figure 24. It can be seen that the
directional element will detect faults correctly in both directions
using the same settings.

Fig 21. One line diagram of Refsdal distribution system.

The 22 kV system and relay settings were also modeled in

protection design software, similar to ATPDraw, from the
information provided in the thesis. The recommended relay
settings to extend the forward operating area are shown in
Fig 23. Impedance plot for extended operating area (correct operation).
Figure 22, and the one line diagram (relay located at 22Fo1E)
is shown in Figure 25. The shunt capacitance of the lines and
cables was taken into account. However, it was assumed that
the lines were transposed. In reality, lines or cables may not be
transposed or fully transposed leading to unbalanced shunt
capacitance. Therefore an adequate margin for the angle
settings needs to be considered since the seen impedance will
shift slightly. For conductive discharge, which always exists,
regardless of whether lines are transposed, the recommended
value of 15% of capacitive discharge from the thesis was used.

Fig 24. Phase angle characteristic for extended operating area (correct
operation).

Fig 22. Relay setting page in protection design software for Refsdal relay.

Fig 25. 22 kV system owned by Statkraft modeled in protection design software.
VIII. CONCLUSION
This paper addressed two applications where capacitive loads
and faults are problematic for traditional directional elements.
Overcoming these challenges required a new way of thinking
with respect to how directional elements are designed and the
systems they are protecting are modeled. From a design
standpoint, extending and retracting the operating area using the
flexible Minimum/Maximum forward and reverse angle settings,
and adjusting the RCA to accommodate the method of neutral
point grounding are the key factors. Also because these features
are built in to the directional element, the relay is easier to set.
With respect to modeling, it is essential to understand fault
behavior for different types of systems and operating scenarios.
10
For example, simulations for wind farm collector units determine
if the conservative approach in this paper is adequate, or if the
relay needs to be desensitized and possibly be made non-
directional since neither angle settings nor load encroachments
methods can be used to block in the expected fault region. If
desired protection cannot be achieved then operational limits
may need to be re-evaluated. For the Refsdal distribution system,
many factors can influence directional element security, such as
degree of coil compensation, value of parallel resistors, and
unbalances due to capacitive/conductive discharge.
Advancements in protection design software now allow for
seamless integration of relays, using custom relay setting
interfaces, and components, such as wind turbine models, to run
the necessary simulations.
 11

IX. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS X. BIOGRAPHIES

On behalf of those authoring this paper it is a privilege to Michael Benitez, P.E., has a B.S.E.E. from University of Florida
and an M.S.E.E. from the University of South Florida. He
express our gratitude for the hard work, long hours and dedication worked at Florida Power and Light from 2004-2010 as a P&C
Mohammad Zadeh, Ph.D., SMIEEE, PE, and Sajal Jain, PE of Engineer. He has been employed at Electric Power Systems since
ETAP have spent creating the power system and relay models 2010, and is Mountain Regional Director. He is a member of the
necessary for the completion of this paper. It is certainly worth EPS’s Technical Committee, and IEEE on several working
mentioning again that the seamless integration of relay settings groups. He is a PE in the State of Colorado and Florida.
into ETAP’s new distance protection StarZ module as they appear Karl M. Smith, P.E., received his B.S.E. from the Colorado
in the relay is a highly effective tool for validating relay School of Mines in 1986 and his M.S.E.E. from the University
performance. From personal experience ETAP’s leadership, of Colorado at Denver in 2000. From 1988 to 1994, he served as
a Nuclear Electricians Mate in the United States Navy aboard the
professionalism and commitment to high quality training is U.S.S. Nimitz. He has a diverse substation background which
unmatched in the protection design software market. Their highly includes operations and maintenance, dispatch, testing, panel
talented staff and resulting innovations are clearly setting the design, project engineering and applications. Karl has worked for
benchmark for the future. several utilities and relay manufacturers throughout his career
before joining ABB as a Product Application Specialist in 2012.
It is also a privilege to express our gratitude to Anniken Liland Karl has participated in many relay conferences both as a paper
Fredriksen and Professor Hans Kristian Hoidalen from the presenter and through automated testing demonstrations. Karl is
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) – a Professional Engineer in the state of Colorado and California.
Department of Electrical Power Engineering for their dedication Joe Xavier graduated in Electrical & Electronics Engineering
and pioneering efforts which contributed significantly to this from Mahatma Gandhi University, India. In 1996 he joined ABB
paper. The ideas and modeling data published in Anniken’s thesis in India and served over 13 years before migrating to the U.S.
titled ‘Earth fault protection in isolated and compensated power Currently, he is the West Region Technical Manager for ABB
distribution systems’ are what the Refsdal example is based on. Distribution Automation division. Joe has co-authored and
presented technical papers on Protection & Automation and is an
IX. REFERENCES active member of IEEE – PSRC
[1] ABB 1MAC050144-MB 615 series Technical Manual Issued: 06/06/2015 Dave Minshall received his B.S.E.E. from Ohio State University
Revision E Product version 4.2.1 and joined ABB in 2012. He has worked in several groups within
[2] Robert Beltz, Ian Peacock, William Vilcheck, P.E., “Application ABB including Substation Automation, Grid Systems, and since
Considerations for High Resistance Ground Retrofits in Pulp and Paper 2014, Distribution Automation where he is working as an
Mills”. Pulp and Paper Industry Technical Conference, 2000. IEEE 2000 Application Engineer providing P&C support for distribution
[3] Anniken Liland Fredriksen. “Earth fault protection in isolated and relays in North America. This includes customer support,
compensated power distribution systems”. Master's thesis, NTNU, 2016.
[4] HV Power Measurements & Protection Ltd. HV Power File: Peterson Coils
acceptance testing, and training.
Basic Principle and Application.doc. Version 1.0 16/4/2012
[5] Ari Wahlroos, Janne Altonen. ABB Oy Distribution Automation – Finland.
“Compensated Networks and Admittance Based Earth-Fault Protection”.
[6] ABB Online Support for Power and Automation Products. “Brief comparison
between IoCos(phi) and WattMetric earth-fault protection principles”.
Published 2007-01-23
[7] Doug Jones and Kyle Bennett, POWER Engineers, Inc., “Wind Farm
Collector Protection using Directional Overcurrent Elements”.
[8] Ryan McDaniel. Application Guide Volume III AG2013-04. “Phase
Directional Overcurrent Settings Recommendations for Wind Farm
Applications Using the SEL-351S”.
[9] John Horak. “Directional Overcurrent Relaying (67) Concepts”.
[10] SEL- 351-5, -6, -7 Protection System Instruction Manual 20170215.
[11] Bing Chen, Arun Shrestha, Fred A. Ituzaro, and Norman Fischer.
“Addressing Protection Challenges Associated With Type 3 and Type 4
Wind Turbine Generators”. 68 th Annual Conference for Protective Relay
Engineers. IEEE 2015
[12] ABB 1MRS756508 630 series Technical Manual Issued: 2014-11-28
Revision E Product version 1.3
[13] Abraham Ellis, Robert Nelson, Edi Von Engeln, Reigh Walling, Jason
McDowell, Leo Casey, Eric Seymour, William Peter, Chris Barker, and
Brendan Kirby. “Reactive Power Interconnection Requirements for PV and
Wind Plants – Recommendations to NERC”. SANDIA REPORT,
SAND2102-1098. Printed February 2012